The Idaho Public Utilities Commission will
take comment through May 31 on an amended power purchase agreement that gives a
developer more time to complete a solar project west of Mountain Home.Idaho Power claims the scheduled online date
was Jan. 30, 2011, though Grand View Solar One claimed it had a “rolling”
scheduled operation date for which a deadline had not expired.

An amended sales agreement proposed by
Idaho Power and the developer sets an operating date of Jan. 12, 2013. The
project, 16 miles west of Mountain Home, will generate up to 10 average
megawatts.

Under terms of the new agreement, Grand
View Solar One posted an $810,000 security for Idaho Power in case the project
is not operating by Jan. 12, 2013. The project also paid $475,000 in a
construction deposit. The agreement also states that if Idaho Power is the
cause of any delays, then the operation date can be extended to accommodate
those delays without penalty to the developer.The manager of the Grand View Solar
PV One project is Robert Paul of Deseret Hot Springs, Calif.

The commission is taking comment on the
amended application through May 31. Comments can be made at the commission Web
site, www.puc.idaho.gov. Click on
“Comments and Questions About a Case,” and enter Case
No. IPC-E-10-19. Comments can also be mailed to P.O.
Box 83720, Boise, ID, 83720-0074.

Complaint by Interconnect Solar dismissed

The developer of a project near Murphy
filed a complaint against Idaho Power, alleging the utility improperly
cancelled its sales agreement with the project and mishandled a study that was
to determine where the project would interconnect with Idaho Power’s
transmission system.

Boise-based Interconnect Solar had a
sales agreement with Idaho Power for the 20-megawatt project that was supposed
to be online by July 1 of this year. In order to qualify for federal tax
incentives, the developer chose an operation date that would come before Idaho
Power believed the required interconnection study and transmission construction
could be completed. Interconnect Solar agreed to accept the risk and proceed
with the project.

An original path proposed for the line
met with objections from the Bureau of Land Management because it crossed along
the Oregon Trail with protected raptor nesting areas. Setbacks regarding interconnection and
transmission caused Interconnect Solar to miss a payment deadline. Interconnect
Solar’s agreement was terminated by Idaho Power because the project failed to
post a required delay security. Interconnect Solar maintained it could not get
a loan to post the delay security because BLM objected to the original path,
which left the project without a valid interconnection agreement.

At the time the sales agreement was
approved, the commission expressed concern regarding the project’s choice for a
commercial operation date. The September 2011 order approving the agreement
stated, “We share the concerns of the commission staff and Idaho Power
regarding Interconnect Solar’s choice of a scheduled operation dates that
precedes Idaho Power’s estimated date for completion of the projects’
interconnection. The project’s optimism may be foolhardy. Interconnect Solar
maintains its position that interconnection will occur ahead of Idaho Power’s
estimated schedule at its own peril.”

A
full text of the commission’s order, along with other documents related to this
case, is available on the commission’s Web site at www.puc.idaho.gov. Click on “File Room”
and then on “Electric Cases” and scroll down to Case No. IPC-E-12-10.

Interested parties may petition the
commission for reconsideration by no later than May 15. Petitions for
reconsideration must set forth specifically why the petitioner contends that
the order is unreasonable, unlawful or erroneous. Petitions should include a
statement of the nature and quantity of evidence the petitioner will offer if
reconsideration is granted. Petitions can be delivered to the commission at 472
W. Washington St. in Boise, mailed to P.O. Box 83720, Boise, ID, 83720-0074, or
faxed to 208-334-3762.